Tuesday, March 06, 2007

That’s the latest lurid expose in the newspapers and television today.

The newspaper Rzeczpospolita and the sensationalist, tabloid TVN program Uwaga claim that Simon Moll – who has given seven women HIV in Poland and is currently in prison waiting to be charged for knowingly spreading the virus – was not politically persecuted in either his home country of Cameroon or in Ghana, where he worked for a while in the early 1990s as a journalist.

The Uwaga program sent a team of journalists to the (very poor) village in Cameroon where he grew up to ‘look for his roots’. After showing his photo to the locals they came upon his brother who took them home to see Moll’s father and mother.

None of the family seemed to know where he was and had not had contact with him for years. When his mother heard what had happened to him recently she burst out crying.

Cue camera zoom in to tight, lingering close up of her tears.

But none of the family or his friends had heard about his ‘political persecution’.

Next the journalists went to Ghana where they made straight for the writers PEN club, of which Moll was once a member.

The PEN club is no more but they found some writers and journalists who knew Simon. They too had never heard of any persecution. In fact, one man they talked to had been to prison nine times for political activities.

The man said that Simon went to Poland as an economic refugee – he just wanted to escape the poverty of Africa – and not a political refugee.

The implication, I think, is that Moll had made the whole persecution story up and in fact 'stole' the life story of his fellow journalist.

The is another sad chapter in a story that you just couldn’t make up.

Or could you?

The saddest part of the TV program was when Simon’s mother, shocked from hearing that her son had HIV, and the Polish police had arrested him for spreading it, sobbed: “I am sick, too [with AIDS?], and I was hoping he would come home to bury me.”

118 comments:

nemeczek
said...

Is the statement that "Simon Mol... is currently in prison WAITING to be charged" correct? I would believe he had to be charged in order for this temporary arrest status to kick in. The only thing he is waiting for is his trial.

Simon's mother said "I was hoping he would come home to bury me". This sad poignant comment is just one more deserving condemnation of how uncaring and selfish a person Simon Mol is. Knowing what we know about this man's activities and character, I wonder if his mother's welfare ever even crossed his mind?

Please explain what they should not have done in the course of presenting this aspect of the news story?"

My girlfriend was watching the program with me – and she is not a fan of Moll’s – when the gory, over long close up of a desperately upset mother was crying her eyes out. Girlfriend was spitting: “parasite journalism”.

There are no investigative journalists in Poland worth the name. If there were they would investigate the stories of senior politicians having prostitutes sent to their rooms at the parliamentary hotel.

I absolutely agree with you. This what TVN Uwaga did was like filming some dead body just after a car crash. The cruel close-up filming of this woman was revolting, really made me sick.

And I do agree that journalists investigating in Cameroon had right to tell this poor woman (Mol's mother) what condition his son was in, but this vulture journalism is something I do disagree with.

I was there when TVN was establishing its journalistic code, reading these workshop documents with my mouth dropped down (I am not a news journalist), but today for the first time TVN reporters lost my respect. Big time.

Yes focusing on the grief of the mother for that period of time was uncalled for. We shouldn’t loose sight of the fact that people are often shown on news programs in a highly emotional state.

Michael Farris said: “they could have been more upfront about why they were looking for people who knew him”

The stigma of Aids could have made people reluctant to talk therefore they likely made a judgement call to omit their real reasons for asking about him. I don’t think there are many Africans very pleased about having them associated with the spread of Aids.

Harry said... “no investigative journalists in Poland worth the name”

The journalists are at the mercy of their editor and if the editor fears to publish a story because of the repercussions (from the powerful) we can’t really blame the journalists.

I happen to be in touch with some of the Cameroonian journalists whom the Polish journalists interviewed in Cameroon; many of them are shocked by the categoric statements attributed to them in the series of articles published today.

How those Polish journalists carried themselves in Cameroon was laughable, beginning with their famous newspaper announcement "If you know him and wish to help him, call us On: Tel (00237) 480 52 20 Or E-Mail Us On: b.kittel@rp.pl". For an internet version of this announcement see: http://www.postnewsline.com/2007/02/announcement.html

Of course everyone (except for Mol's mother and relatives in the village) knew that they were not out to help.

The journalists had the opportunity to paint a more complete portrait of Simon Mol, but wasted time writing about "Feymania" and other Cameroonian criminal activities which have nothing to do with the Simon Mol case...

It’s amazing how a good piece of journalism can turn vampiric. The story itself was good – they appear to have added to the knowledge of Moll’s story. It is a genuine exclusive. But the close up that so upset me and the girlfriend (traczka) was just TOO LONG. If it had been a second or two then OK, but it seemed to dwell on the face…

So the difference between good and bad piece of journalism was decided there by a matter of seconds.

And there was something prurient about the whole piece, and the articles in the press. In fact this whole story stinks of grubby hacks enjoying themselves at someone elses expense.

In Holocaust studies there exists the problem of the "fake survivors." The best known example is "Benjamin Wilkomirsky." These individuals slipped into the self-fabricated identity of a Holocaust victim. Most probably they believe in the stories they tell, which makes them so convincing. Only occasionally they exaggerate too much and tell obvious falsehoods, which leads to their debunking. But nobody knows how many fake survivors remain undetected. Luckily their damage to society is marginal.

The fake identity problem also occurs among "victims" of White Colonialism. The bad conscience inculcated in Western countries (including Poland) with regard to their role as perpetrators or bystanders in crimes against humanity (colonialism, slavery, or the Holocaust), makes that today in these countries the status of a "victim of persecution" is somewhat "sacred." Unwritten convention does not allow to investigate or criticize a "victim," it demands to show compassion, to sympathize with him. If he behaves indecently, you have to excuse his behavior with the wounds that his past life had inflicted on him.

Clever "asylum seekers" such as Simon Mol adroitly exploit this situation in their guest countries. In general, however, they behave modest, restricting themselves to obtaining financial aids, housing, or citizenship. If they commit minor offences, such as obtaining aids by devious means, or fare dodging, or beating or insulting a person who belongs to the white majority, or small theft, the authorities, as a rule, turn a blind eye, not wanting to run the risk of being publicly accused of "racism" or "fascist behavior" by human rights campaigners.(I could give some telling examples from my relatives - teacher, social worker, policeman - in Germany.)

Some, however, overstep the mark. If an asylum seeker is caught dealing with drugs, the police and the prosecuting attorney's office can no more keep their eyes shut. The same applies to knowingly infecting a person with HIV, if the infected individual reports this to the police. Simon Mol could have continued leading a pleasant life in Poland and the neighboring countries that he used to visit, if he had not made a fatal mistake: making love to his "acquisitions" without using a condom. Simon Mol's career would have given Molière a nice plot for a stage play.

Is the internet/blogging so qualitatively different than TV? Take a gander at that contrapose o' dat wood carving and dat lady again. The images don't go away. There have been more than a few uses of other such uncomplimentary photos here on the BR blog.

Geez – you are making an outrageous comparison between what I do occasionally with photos – i.e. take the piss out of someone who has VOLUTARILY ENTERED THE PUBLIC DEBATE ABOUT SOMETHING and a camera stuck in the face of woman who has just learnt that her son has a desease that could kill him and is facing extremely serious criminal charges in a country far away of which she knows nothing about.

If you can’t see the difference between those two very different uses of pictures then well…

That’s just confused, journalists do not control the media, those who own the newspaper, TV or radio station have control over what’s published. Journalists are free to quit if they can’t go along with the editorial policies of the management.

Jan’s right. Journalists have very little power, at the end of the day, over content.

In print it’s the worst. You hand in an article you have sweated over, then a sub gets hold of it and starts hacking away. The ultimate power is then with the editor, who may decide to chuck the whole lot in the bin (or ‘spike it’, as they say).

In broadcasting, journalists have a little more freedom, but it is still the editor/producer that has the power.

"TVN does that kind of "journalism" all the time with Polish people, but only now it becomes worth of condemnation"

Three points:

1. They don't fly half way round the world to exploit Polish people's personal agony. There was that Poles-behind-foreign-bars series which was pretty horribly exploitive.

2. I'm on record fairly early as thinkng Simon Mol is probably a sociopath (though the idea he was having sex in order to give his partners hiv is purely stupid).

3. tvn exploiting polish people's problems isn't especially likely to cause problems for other people in poland, exploiting the simon mol case is going to have a bad effect on legitimate non-western/affluent foreigners in Poland and you're kidding yourself if you think it won't.

And where are you supposed to be looking for Polish people? Besides, as you note, they did that series on Poles in South American prisons. (Although I must admit, that one at least had some didactic value).

exploiting the simon mol case is going to have a bad effect on legitimate non-western/affluent foreigners in Poland and you're kidding yourself if you think it won't.

The TVN journos have clearly demonstrated that Polish immigration system sucks big time and any criminal who claims political persecution can get in. Which automatically begs the question: how many similar cases do we have in store? If you think this shouldn't be investigated because it will have bad effect on immigrants, well: if it is not investigated, it can potentially have much worse impact on the whole society.

Sorry Geez but I do not except that there was anything remotely similar between the photo of Mrs Kaczynski (which showed that she was an ‘eco warrior’ – that was the point of me putting up the photo) and intrusive camera work of some innocent. I am amazed you make this comparison.

Opamp is right: Uwaga program does go in for this kind of crap regularly – still don’t make it nice, or right.

As far as the Polish immigration system goes: this shows, maybe, that making it difficult for economic migrants to move around causes more trouble than its worth. Africans should have access to all European markets, with no tariffs or restrictions, and that includes labour markets.

OK BR, sorry in that it was indeed quite a stretch. But I still don't like any kind of journalism that mocks anybody's looks. Better to go after their behavior. And even then there's are considerations that should be taken.

Humanist, indeed. We are the devil incarnate and we are coming for your daughters!

I would have thought you Poles would understand the consequences of racism. Remember WW II? Well, that was only possible because a bunch of Nazis thought that you lot were sub humans. And the racism of the 18th and 19th century made the slave trade and colonialism possible. Without racism it would have been impossible to exploit people like that.

Indeed. You should know from our history that we have never had any colonies and so obviously cannot share your colonial guilt over the activities of your late Empire. You claim that we should be sharing this colonial guilt, but the only reason for it would be that we happen to be white. In other words, because you are white and we are white, we are by extension co-responsible for your colonial activities. This is clearly a reasoning along the racial lines.

And I call bullshit. We not only didn't have colonies, we were being colonized and exploited throughout the 19th and 20th century. And we withstood that, without any outside help, because your people didn't miss a single occasion to sell us in order to protect their own short-term interests.

When our neighbors made attempts to eradicate us, your people were busy getting rich selling opium to China. When Germans were bombing, robbing and killing us by thousands, you had to withstand an occasional stray V-1 rocket hitting London. When we were trying to live under a Russian-imposed communist regime, your people were busy with free love and LSD.

And now you are coming here lecturing us, that we should be feeling the guilt. Over the African people we never had any dealing with. Over our anti-Semitism, so widespread and profound, that Yad Vashem run out of space to plant the trees commemorating the Jews our people saved from the Germans during the war. Over expelling the Germans which perpetrated the war against us (yes, the Germans, not some abstract Nazis from your history books). Over our intolerance of homosexuals, manifesting in the fact that we oppose their activists going to schools and telling children there is no such thing as gender. And over our racism, because we dared to put in jail a criminal who happened to have dark skin.

We are proud that we have survived; we demand your respect, not your leftist sermons.

But obviously that was a slightly too subtle a point I was making, wasn´t it?»

I said that because that is what happened. It was perfectly obvious that I was relating Poles suffering of racism and colomialism to African experience -that's what the original comment was about - but you failed to see it.

And I was wrong to claim that you didn't see it because it was too subtle. Because it wasn't. IT WAS OBVIOUS.

That's why you should be able to have more empathy for colonialized subjects.

We have empathy for them. We just don't think we owe them anything.

@geez:

Do you think all blacks are inferior and/or criminal

No.

and therefore unwelcome as immigrants or even temporary workers in Poland?

I am aware of several cases of blacks being good members of our society and I am inclined to think this would be the case for the majority of them (although I have never seen the statistics). In fact, Simon Mol is the first case of criminal behavior of a black person in Poland that I know of. (Oh, and by the way, I have nothing against mixed marriages. )

The problem however, is that certain Western countries (i.e. France) did allow uncontrolled immigration from African and Arab countries, leading to the creation of immigrant communities, characterized by high unemployment and crime rates and political radicalism. This is something clearly undesirable. Therefore I believe that any assertions that we are somehow obliged to let into the country an unrestricted number of foreigners are simply dangerous.

And notice how you etc have widened the debate about how an indivudual's behaviour like Mol's has become an argument about AFricans and immigration.

Mol is not Cameroon, or Ghana, or anywhere. He is an individual. If he has been a bastard then that is as far as it goes. It does not mean Africans - or African immigrants to Poland - are to blame for anything.

We are talking about race when we should be talking about individuals.

But that does not mean either that Black chip on shoulder prejudice against whites is qualitativly the same as white racism against blacks.

Blacks have never invaded, occupied and controled a white society. Blacks have suffered mass and organized exploitation by colonialist powers. They have suffered from discrimination in employment, housing, schooling on a systematic basis.

So a prejudice is a prejudice. But racism is prejudice plus power.

Blacks have never had the power to turn a prejudice into racism (except Robert Mugabe, perhaps).

You can't recruit someone to be homosexual. What I object to is gay activists indoctrinating people with their own worldview: that homosexuals are somehow special and should be privileged (cf. gay marriage - why should gays be allowed to marry and not say polygamists?).

Finally, do you think Poles can do no wrong?

Of course they can. The reason why I am debating you is that I accept the possibility that I may be wrong (although at the moment I still believe that it's you who is wrong here). What I don't like is that you are arguing from the position of moral superiority when it's doubtful if you have any over me.

And notice how you etc have widened the debate about how an indivudual's behaviour like Mol's has become an argument about AFricans and immigration.

I have widened it?

When the case broke out it could have been dealt with in three phrases ("African refugee suspected of infecting Polish women with HIV. Racist idiots post shit on forums. Trouble for immigrants expected."). But, noooo. Instead, you have produced a diatribe asserting that Mol's arrest is a case of racist persecution and an orchestrated anti-immigrant media campaign, fueled by an inherent Polish racism and backwardness. And when people (including me) point that such argument doesn't hold water, we are labeled racists, xenophobic, homophobic, and what not. And you cite the most damning evidence possible: we didn't denounce Murzynek Bambo as racist propaganda!

@ opamp:You are right, Poland didn't have colonies in the strict sense of international law. But when you speak of Poland having herself been colonized - I assume you think of the Partitions and the Germanizing and Russification attempts in the Prussian or the Russian occupied parts of Poland - how would you call the attempts of Polonizing the Western Ukraine (or East Galicja, if you like) in the interwar period, including forced conversion to Catholicism of the indigenous population, "pacification" and settlement politics? No colonizing?

Let me further remember that the Polish delegation at Versailles - in vain - demanded parts of the former German colonial empire for Poland. But the perfidious Albion and the treacherous Marianne would not share the booty with their new ally. During the whole interwar period, the Polish government again and again brought up the colonies issue at the international level, among others with the argument that Poland needed space to "resettle" the Jews who Poland desperately wanted to get rid of.

And last but not least: have you ever heard of the Liga Morska i Kolonialna? It was a mass organisation in interwar Poland with over one million members. It propagated the idea that Poland needed colonies overseas to maintain her status as a great European power. So Poland's "colonial innocence" is by far not her own merit. How would you think about an old spinster who never had a chance to make love to a man and who is proud of her virginity?

Me thinks there is a very obvious problem with that sentence - it seems to negate itslef.

There is no contradiction. The homosexualism itself is a natural, inherent and unchangable sexual preference (although not a majority one). On the other hand, the worldview of certain LGBT activists that the homosexualism is superior, demands for marriage, parades etc. is a strictly political matter and is being opposed by me as such.

Well, the mere existence of Liga Morska i Kolonialna does no more harm to my argument than the existence of UK's L5 society does to the argument that the UK didn't colonize the space, namely: in both cases there were no actual colonies, so the point is moot.

Regarding the issue of Polonization of Ukrainians. First, the "colonized" Ukrainians still had full citizenship rights in Poland (all the way since 16th century), which was not the case with Western colonization. Second, I'd like to point out that this alleged harm done to Ukrainians is vastly overshadowed by the extremely bloody activities of the Ukrainian UPA in the immediately post-war period. (The details on this are available, although not being widely publicized due to political reasons and the plain horror of events described).

So, there is no way to spin the argument that we owe anything to any nation for our past deeds.

opamp, the reason I asked you the questions I did was because I had some idea that you would essentially answer them the way you did. For the most part, I think you argue reasonably, even if I find much with which to disagree.

I also specifically asked if you agreed with the two posters (Marta and anonymous -piotr?) who seem to me to be extraordinarily racist, homophobic, and have a sense of moral superiority best expressed as Polska uber alles!

So I deeply resent, especially, where you get off with the moral superiority accusation against me.

I was hoping you might consider distancing yourself from such vile opinions but instead you decided to attack me.

So despite my having thought the best of you, I can see with whom you really align. And I now won't believe a fucking word you say and I won't waste my time reading a word you post.

But opamp's arguments lose credibility, not so much always because of substance, but when he goes into the ad hominem mode. Being Catholic and of Polish American ethnicity, I agree with him on many issues more than I do with the left and libertarian posters on the BR blog. But opamp's ad hominem is always without variation against "the left" or some related strawman. Never a word of caution to or criticism of the frothing freaks. That's why I will no longer distinguish him from them; he certainly makes no attempt. Consequently, at core, I've reluctantly but not adamantly have come to the conclusion that he is of their ilk, only a bit brighter and sly.

BTW, I never defended Mol (aside from insisting on due process). I am not a Marxist. Very much the opposite on both counts.

Nevertheless, it´s a waste of time discussing with intolerant leftists obsessed with political correctness.

Piotr

So we assume that you won't be coming here and wasting your time any further Piotr?

But please do come back! We need you to be here. Because if you are here then we, in the way that all foreigners do, can be out and about fucking your women and stealing your land! All the things which you hear at the Hitler Youth (sorry, I mean, All-Polish Youth)meetings are correct!

Anonymous is so brave he can't even give his name! Of course he's brave enough to try and insult people (sorry but calling me a nigger is really not even slightly insulting) and if he's in a pack of a dozen or more similar proto-humans, he might even be brave enough to harass a 75-year old Vietnamese woman.

BR Please encourage him to stay, we need him to be busy here while we put our Jewish Satanic Communist plot into effect and turn Poland to the dark side!

Robin Morgan (white author)—“My white skin disgusts me. My passport disgusts me. They are the marks of an insufferable privilege bought at the price of others’ agony. If I could peel myself inside out I would be glad. If I could become part of the oppressed I would be free.” [Robert Boatman, “Trent Lott’s of the Left,” Frontpagemag.com (online), January 3, 2003.]

It just shows you how little you understand politics that you could think that Robin Morgan – someone I wrote many about essays about at university, all of them very critical (she is like Andrea Dworkin) – was my favourite author.

So, go on: try again – try and make a political argument.

I have to say I don’t think this kind of politics is going to get very far. If they can’t even formulate a reasonable political case, and enter into a debate, then all they are going to attract to their cause is psychopaths.

Chancellor Williams (Afrocentrist and author of The Destruction of Black Civilization)

—“The necessary re-education of Blacks and a possible solution of the racial crisis can begin . . . only when Blacks fully realize this central fact to their lives: the white man is their Bitter Enemy.” [Phil Collier and David Horowitz, The Race Card, 1997, p. 104.]

^ Which great men? If you have to resort to attempting to portray us as the kind of people who think Mugabe is a great man then you are even more desperate and stupid than I thought you were. Robert Mugabe is a very strong contender for the title of most evil man on the planet. If I was locked in a room with Mugabe, both the Giertychs and a loaded gun, I'd fire every single bullet into Mugabe just to make sure he's dead.

Anon: I think you confuse racial prejudice with racism. For sure, blacks have prejudices against whites, as whites have about blacks.

I have many friends in London from the Caribbean…they have LOTS of prejudices against Africans.

But usually blacks – in the Uk or US, for instance – are not in a position to enforce those prejudices via discrimination. And those discriminatory practices cannot become engrained in the actions of the state (through actions by police, immigration law etc.)

So a prejudice has to be put in social context. Therefore, a black prejudice is not often racism.

racism1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

Interesting attitude, Beatroot. If a definition provided by a reputable source contradicts your opinion, you dismiss the source (Merriam-Webster) as stupid. What’s next Beatroot? Solar system?

Another definition of racism, this time from a smart book you probably grew up with – Encyclopedia Britannica:

“Any action, practice, or belief that reflects the racial worldview — the ideology that humans are divided into separate and exclusive biological entities called "races," that there is a causal link between inherited physical traits and traits of personality, intellect, morality, and other cultural behavioral features, and that some "races" are innately superior to others.”

http://concise.britannica.com/search?query=racism

Is this English (God save the Queen) product complete bollocks as well?

Fair point and I suppose I better had explain why I think that the Websters definition is unsociological and bollocks.

Any action, practice, or belief that reflects the racial worldview — the ideology that humans are divided into separate and exclusive biological entities called "races," that there is a causal link between inherited physical traits and traits of personality, intellect, morality, and other cultural behavioral features, and that some "races" are innately superior to others.”

There are many different definitions of what racism is. That is just one of them and only defines racial prejudices and racial discrimination.

But racial prejudices are meaningless without the power to enact them as discrimination. So a black man in the American south in the 1950s had prejudices against whites. But he had no power to make those prejudices to count systematically. Where as the prejudices that whites had (have) in the deep south back then had a materialistic power, because whites were dominant and could enforce their prejudices in the form of state legislation (blacks could only sit in the back of the bus, etc).

So the websters definition is insufficient because it does not take into account power relations.

A black’s prejudices in Apartheid South Africa and a white’s prejudices in the same place cannot be equated as equal.

That’s why the websters definition is ahistorical and therefore meaningless and bollocks.

“… racial prejudices are meaningless without the power to enact them as discrimination.”

Good point, however it has its shortcomings because it treats white people as one big, monolithic group. In the 1950s rich white descendant of plantation owners in the South had very little in common with poor Eastern European immigrant (or his off springs) in Detroit, Chicago and Pittsburgh. The former ruled while the latter worked his tail off in order to survive. Did Mr. Kowalski, and employee of a meat plant in Chicago or a steel mill in Pittsburgh, have the power to enslave anybody?

All my ancestors were peasants in central Poland, which means that until probably mid XIX century they were serfs. To the disappointment of many their impact on the slave trade in the New World has not been proven yet, hence – according to your definition of racism - not all whites are racists even if they consider blacks inferior.

it has its shortcomings because it treats white people as one big, monolithic group

That was not my intention. The Webster’s definition, like all dictionary definitions make simplifications. It mentions the word ‘ideology’. Now just that one word has millions of definitions. But racist ideology is rooted in power relationships. The form of those ideas come from the top of society and serve its interests, but not everyone agrees with those ideas. Not all white, by any means, think in racial terms.

And historically there are few societies where blacks have dominated whites, therefore the important thing about black prejudices against whites is that they are a response to real, or perceived, oppression.

What is the point of coming to blogs like this one if you can not debate something?

All you are doing is saying that you have no political position at all...just primitive prejudices...so how do you expect to win new converts?

This is why I disagree with 'liberals you think folks like you are dangerous...you are not...the non-politics that you express will not become popular in Europe...because you are not able to express what you think.

Since the begining, you have been insulting a few dozen people who «dare» to oppose your opinions.Some of those «fuckers, wankers, impotents, sad jokes,fascists, racists, etc.» would like to dabate with you but FACE TO FACE.

It took some time, but was not so difficult to find out who you are, where you work, live, etc.

So one of these days,when you are not expecting, you will have the opportunity to repeat the insults you wrote here .

If you ‘dare’ to have opinions would you like to try and articulate them…then we can have a debate. So far, however, people like you have not tried to express any opinions…many of you have done what you have done…make stupid threats.

A person who has to make threats without trying to make a political argument has lost that argument.

Wow anonymous! You are so brave! You can't even give your name but you can make threats against Beatroot! What a real man you are! Any time you want to hear from me face to face that racists are arseholes just let me know. Come on, let's do it. You can explain to the big bad black man your theories about how white people are superior and then we can find out who actually is superior.

Well, it's a progress. At least you don’t deny the fact that blacks can be as bad as whiteys, but what bothers me is that your statement provides an excuse for black racism. It is unfortunately very popular attitude among American blacks.

Oh, yeah, we whites all work together as a well lubricated collective.

When the Germans invaded Poland almost 70 years ago they thought of the Poles as their partners in power, not as sub humans. And when 2 weeks later the Soviets joined them they also just wanted to expand the white collective, not grab some land. After all we are all white, aren’t we? We get along very well, don’t we?

Beatroot, you really sound like many African Americans. In their minds the world is divided in two parts: white and non-white, and the root of every conflict are always skin color, nothing else.

About 300 anti-fascists marched in Wroclaw yesterday to mark International Day Against Racism. 2 arrests of anti-fascists were reported to have taken place when scraps broke out between both sides and the cops took the side, as per usual, of the boneheads!

Inciting racial hatred and using fascist slogans doesn't seem to be something the cops are too interested in tackling here from my experience.

When the Germans invaded Poland almost 70 years ago they thought of the Poles as their partners in power, not as sub humans.

That is such utter nonsense it is just luaghable. The Nazis had a hierachy of humns. Aryans at the top, Slavs (Poles, Russians etc) were near the bottom. The plan for Poland was to turn it into some kind of slave camp, where they could use Poles as free labor.

That you don't even no that is very strange. What have they been teaching you at school?

Well, I guess the sarcasm in my post didn’t convey and you took my statement to the letter.

What I meant to say was that there is no difference between racism and other forms of discrimination. Whites can enslave blacks as much as they can other whites. And a quick look at the conflict in Darfur only confirms that violence may directed at people who look just like the oppressors.

Simon Moll knowingly spread his disease and deserves jail time. Period. It had nothing to do with his race. How would you feel if he infected someone in your family???

And people who are talking about colonization are just plain stupid. Poland never colonized a country in its entire history. It was one of the first countries in the world to have a modern constitution in 1791 which made all persons equal no matter which race they were from. So learn history before you people out there write ridiculous statements! Of course there are racists in Poland just like everywhere else in the world - don’t forget about the KKK, Nazi's, etc - that didn't originate from Poland.

I don't know whether it's just me or if perhaps everybody else experiencing issues with your site. It appears like some of the written text in your posts are running off the screen. Can somebody else please provide feedback and let me know if this is happening to them too?This may be a problem with my web browser because I've had this happen previously. Many thanks

I also am a blogger, and I was interested about your situation.A group of us has used the occasion to formulate some strategies and we'd like to share ideas with fellow bloggers. If you'd be intrigued, please get in touch with me via email.